Nvidia 8600M performance, general discussion

1. The G1S is DDR3.
2 The main difference b/w the cards is the extra 16 stream processors on the GT, which are disabled on the GS.

 

its still definitely faster. im not sure by how much exactly. its hard to tell.

 

I think hmmm memory bandwith on the Xbox360 is not correct. I'm not sure where he got that information, but the memory shouldn't be any better than the top ATI cards of that day, even if it is onboard. The memory is still GDDR3 and is shared with the main processory. The biggest thing about the xenos is that it had unified shaders first. I still think the PS3 is better though, it has the equivilant of about a 7900gt.

 

I know the ASUS G1 has the GDDR3 86GT, but I can't find any benchmarks that compare equivalent systems. I would like the know the ACTUAL performance difference between the two types of VRAM.

I know it's supposed to half the "memory bandwidth", but what in the world does that mean?

 

I don't think computers are meant to be compared to consoles, in fact.. I find it somewhat ridiculous when people do.

Console games will usually be optimized for a single configuration (thusly all 360 consoles have the same parts except hard drives and colors and all that jazz) so they will usually run at a predetermined universal level.

While pc games can be personally optimized for performance/quality. Not to mention the PC's can do far more than a 360 in terms of use.

It's comparing a bare gaming platform to a multi-tasking machine that just so happens to play games as well, albeit better in some cases.

 

I don't know why the admin merged my thread into this one.

Just because it says "8600M GT" doesn't mean it pertains to this thread.

My question was in no way answered by this thread, and yes I had already read this thread multiple times before I asked my question.

GDDR2 vs. GDDR3 comparison/benchmarks between EQUIVALENT systems?

 

yeah, I don't think it's best to merge the threads, but w/e

 

You mean DDR2 vs GDDR3, right?
Anyhow, I've never seen such a comparison, because it basically doesn't exist. I know of no system that has an option for GDDR3 besides the MBP and the G1s, and if you compare either of those to a DDR2 system (Dell 1520, Acer Gemstone, Compal IFL90) you won't be comparing "equivalent" systems. Also, the G1s comes with a faster processor and the MBP has other issues going on (it's performance can't really be directly compared to a PC's performance), so the benchmarks will always be a little skewed. However the best you can really do is find all the 3dmark06 posts in the Compal forum, average them, and see how they compare to the 3dmark06 posts in the Apple and Asus forums, keeping in mind the fact that the latter two have faster processors.

 

^Thanks for the info Odin, I guess I'll do some manual comparisons, LOL.

 

I'm expecting to receive my 1520 within the next week, and I'd like to know what sort of performance results I should be getting(not exact, of course). The most demanding games I'll be playing are Oblivion and Battlefield 2, I'd just like to know what I should be able to get in terms of frame rates(resolution will be 1280x800 or less) and what settings I should be able to play on for the best performance or tastiest eye candy. I don't plan on playing any new releases later on. Specs:

Core 2 Duo T5450 (1.66GHz)

2GB RAM

Windows Vista Home Premium

8600M GT (GDDR2 )

160GB 5400RPM Hard Drive

 

Oblivion will see min averages of 20+ fps. That's what I get on my 8600 GS, and that's a weaker card than the 8600 GT.

 

the only thing that is going to keep u back is the entry level processor

 

I don't think the processor is going to be a problem. It is quite powerful even though it is on the lower-end side.

 

With my G2S I use a mod called Streamline, if you've ever heard of it. It purges the cell buffers and smoothes the FPS. I play with forced shadows and grass off, and set the FPS smoothing between 40 and 50. Large textures. I let Streamline handle the distances, and it runs like a perfect dream. The GDDR3 might have something to do with it. =/

And BF2. Dude. Max the settings. No problem!

 

Well my thread was merged into here but I couldn't really find my answer.

My questions are:

1) How does a DDR2 8600 GS compare to a DDR2 8600 GT? (Like practically, not in terms of pipelines etc.)

2) Does the Asus S96S have a 700mhz core 8600 GS or a 400mhz?

 

As far as I know, the 8600GS is produced basically exclusively with GDDR3. The nvidia stock core clock speed for the GS is 600MHz, the Asus might be slightly lower than that, but you can bet it won't be higher. As for comparisons, a stock 8600GS performs extremely similarly to a Go7700, however most 8600GS's seem to be underclocked (i.e. F3Sv). A stock DDR2 8600GT appears to benchmark only slightly higher than a stock 8600GS, but in real world applications it appears to be between 10 and 30 percent stronger, at least.

 

Well if most stock 8600GS's are underclocked, couldn't you bring that up to match a stock 8600GT?

 

No, not really. The stock GDDR3 8600GS is still slower than the DDR2 8600GT. The underclocked versions of the 8600GS are even slower still.

 

Hi,

I'm looking to buy this laptop

http://www.evesham.com/products/info.asp?e=0B8E9097-D03B-4C8A-815F-CF3B3D973EE1

I mainly only play Counter Strike:Source and BF2 online. I guess this laptop will be up to the job.

I currently have an old P4 2.8 desktop with an AGP Nvidia 6600GT 128MB. Am i going to see an improvement in graphics on the laptop above?

 

You will see a major improvement in graphics. The 8700m-GT is about 30% faster than the 6600GT, and the T7500 would blow your old P4 out of the water.

 

I am wondering. I'm planning to get an IFL90 with the 8600m-GT 512mb, a T7300 processor, and 2 gigs of ram, how well do you think it will handle...say...Unreal Tournament 3? *is hopeful*

 

Well, Bioshock uses the Unreal Engine 3, and these are it's requirements.

Minimum System Requirements CPU - Pentium 4 2.4GHz Single Core processor System
RAM - 1GB
Video Card - Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 128MB RAM (NVIDIA 6600 or better/ATI X1300 or better, excluding ATI X1550).
Sound Card - 100% direct X 9.0c compatible sound card Hard disc space - 8GB free space

Recommended System Requirements CPU - Intel Core 2 Duo processor System
RAM - 2GB
Video card - DX9 - Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 512MB RAM (NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GT or better) / DX10 - NVIDIA GeForce 8600 or better
Sound Card - Sound Blaster X-Fi series (Optimized for use with Creative Labs EAX ADVANCED HD 4.0 or EAX ADVANCED HD 5.0 compatible sound cards)

 

so its below the recommended requirement

 

It meets the recommended requirements, as it has a Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, and an 8600.

 

The 8600M GT in the Sager2090 that is, not the G1S or anything. This will be with a T7300 and the usual 2 gigs of RAM.

And by "well" I mean high or highest settings, and a moderate resolution (say, 1280x800 or so).

 

Well, the desktop 8600 series is the "recommended" requirement for Bioshock, which is on the Unreal 3 engine (I believe). So the 8600GT should be able to run Unreal 3 games at least medium settings, though I would be prepared to turn anti aliasing down. At 1280x800 you should get good fps.

 

remember to overclock~!

 

It should do fine at WXGA resolution and medium settings.

The more memory (both system RAM and video RAM), the better for the amazing textures and effects.

 

after rainbow six vegas's extensive patching, it is running pretty good on the 8600m gt.

i expect ut3 to be optimized MUCH better for the PC than rainbow six vegas was.

 

Good to hear...so hopefully at least medium-high settings.

And yeah, I will probably look into overclocking my 8600M GT when I get it...though I've never overclocked anything before, so I'll probably be a bit reluctant to try it. Scared I'll break something. XD. But getting an underclocked card with DDR2 memory rather than the G1S's version is rather irritating.

 

DX10 mode, probably very poorly.
DX9 mode probably medium setting.


system requirements don't paint a very accurate picture though

look at Call of Juarez's recommended requirement
ECOMMENDED SYSTEM CONFIGURATION:

Windows 2000/XP
P IV 3GHz/AMD Athlon 3000+ (3GHz for Celeron)
1 GB RAM
Video card: GeForce 6800/ATI Radeon X800
Sound card DX 9 compatible
500 MB of free space on hard drive
DirectX 9.0c



a desktop 8600GT(600 core clock, 1600 memory clock) which is far more powerful card than 6800(i have both) got 11fps on 1280*1024 w/o AA in the latest review!(DX10 mode)

 

what dah.... are u serious? i never heard of such factor ><;
sigh.

 

not trying to scare you but
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3029&p=3

knock down the 8600GT fps by another 20-30% and you'll get 8600M GT performance.

but DX9 performance should be alot better than that, probalby double the DX10 performance.

 

ahem... UT3 Thread has system requirements that are up-to-date.

(gathered from multiple sources and interviews with Epic)

 

I did see a thread comparing the 8400M GS and the 8600M GT, but I am interested in how the 8600M GS and GT line up.

I have seen a couple comments here and there comparing them, but not very much and I'd like to know a bit more.

Will I notice a significant difference? I'm interested in having the capacity of playing all the games on the market now, and hopefully for some time to come... and to have them look pretty decent.

 

that thread is on the same page as this,you didnt look lol

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=125246

Check this out, for all the info you need and more...

 

Eh, I'll listen to the "DX10 performance sucks" when I've seen it. Drivers should be improving over time anyway. And nothing personal hlcc, but given the conflicting opinions, I think I'd rather trust the guys with several thousand posts over the guy with a couple hundred >>;

And if the recommended specs recommend the 8600 for desktops, then I think it's safe to assume the 8600M GT should be a bit below that performance, but still in the general range? (Though I really don't know how how the mobile versions compare to the desktop versions, other than the fact that they're obviously weaker...)

 

Call of Juarez wasn't made specifically with dx10 in mind. So I think a game like UT3 will run dx10 better. Dx10 is new, I expect it to steadily get better, not stay exactly where it is.

 

I apologize for a being very amateur about these things... but:

How much better is an NVidia 8600M GT with 512Mb of DDR2 (Sager 2090) going to be when compared to the same card with 256Mb of DDR2 Memory. (Inspiron 1520)

What if the 256 is of DDR3? Does the Inspiron use DDR3?

I hope I've communicated my question well. I certainly am not too familiar with many technical terms.

Help would be very appreciated...

 

The 1520 uses DDR2. The performance boost between 256 and 512 is negliagable in these mid range cards.

 

sure i hope newer drivers will boost DX10 performance, but i'm not optimistic. This is how I see it, I have a 8600GT desktop and it performs well in DX9 but it's starting to show its limitations with the new games in DX9 mode (Stalker, Lost Planet, Dirt). DX10 brings out more details in games, more details =more demanding= less performance.
I guess theres a reason the Geforce 9 replacement for the 8600 is coming out near the end of this year, about 5-7 month after 8600GT's launch.

 

Does anybody know the best Nvidia control panel settings for games? some of my games are running slow............

 

Generally it's best to let the application decide, and use the in-game settings to boost performance. I would start by lowering or turning off Anti-Aliasing, then I would lower things like shadows and water effects, and finally lower the filtering (turn off AF) and even the resolution.

 

----------------------------
Gefore 8600m GT 256mb ddr2

Geforce 8600m GT 256mb ddr3
----------------------------

The notebook I'm getting from dell doesn't offer the ddr3 card.

 

you will see varying answers. in reality, the ddr2 version is somewhat slower but not drastically slower. nothing severe.

 

I would say that the good or better drivers aren't out yet... i can't even change the image sharpening on the nvidia control panel yet.....8600M GT heheh... and Nfs carbon actually runs smoother on my friends ATI x700....

 

Just out of curiosity, which drivers are you using? I would recommend the 160.04 drivers for Vista 32-bit.

 

nfs carbon has a vista specific issue. if your friend is on vista, its vista, not the 8600m.

that card in windows xp works like a charm.

 

m using the 163.11.... yeah can adjust the digital vibrance with this driver.... frens on xp and i'm on vista... so that explains the lag... sorta on carbon... yeah i guess its just a driver issue but guess will just have to wait.... still want to be able to adjust the image sharpening though... damn.....